A few weeks (or was it months?) ago I wrote about my fascination with Polymaths.

I am not a so-called Polymath. Though studying them gives me some insight into those (like myself) who leap deeply into a variety of interests and make a living at them.

I don’t consider myself a Polymath for many reasons but mainly because my primary areas of interest (acting, screenwriting, music, psychology, history, film directing and editing) reside in pretty much the same creative house, or so I think.

But I did happen to stumble across an article in More Intelligent Life (via the Idea of the Day blog) which suggests Polymaths are no longer possible or desirable and why.

Here’s a blurb from Scientist/Writer/Polymath Carl Djerassi:

“Nowadays people that are called polymaths are dabblers—are dabblers in many different areas,” he says. “I aspire to be an intellectual polygamist. And I deliberately use that metaphor to provoke with its sexual allusion and to point out the real difference to me between polygamy and promiscuity.”

“To me, promiscuity is a way of flitting around. Polygamy, serious polygamy, is where you have various marriages and each of them is important. And in the ideal polygamy I suspect there’s no number one wife and no number six wife. You have a deep connection with each person.” MORE

If you read “person” as a creative discipline then I say, “Ditto.” Here’s a list of MIL’s “20 Living Examples of Polymaths.”


I do have to say the whole idea of a world where Polymaths are no longer evident nor desired does depress me some.

It reminds me of that line from “Angels in America”:

“The twentieth century. Oh dear, the world has gotten so terribly, terribly old.”